How about keeping transactions short? I thought that would be at the same level of importance as others.

This https://us.macmillan.com/author/sujathagidla/ writer says even Communists are not immune to caste influences. This book is a hard read, but it is worth a read to understand some of the background: https://us.macmillan.com/books/9780374537821

A couple of (I hope easy) requests - 1. Can we add separators in constants (C++ does 0xFFFF'FFFF'FFFF'FFFF any other reasonable scheme is fine too?)

2. I think many compilers already do this, but can the static initialization rules be relaxed a bit?

  static const int a = 0;
  static const int b = a; /* This is not standard C afaik. */

Thank you, CodeandC

WG14 in general looks favorably at proposals to align C more closely with C++ (within the overall spirit of the language) and I'd expect (1) would viewed in that light.

I'd also say there is consensus that (2) would be beneficial. There are some good ideas in http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n2067.pdf although I don't think repurposing the register keyword for it was very popular. Not just because it wouldn't be compatible with C++ which deprecated register some time ago, but also because it's novel with no implementation or user experience behind it. My impression that this is waiting for a new proposal.

A binary literal would be nice too. Doing masks for embedded systems makes my head hurt sometimes. "Cpp compatibility" etc etc could be the excuse to implement it.